States want performance-based teacher pay

[Selznak]

Several U.S. states are considering proposals that would base teacher pay on student test scores rather than seniority.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi/20060306-040543-9966r.htm

 

[Silent Bob]

Is it the teacher's fault that kids are more interested in going to the mall than learning where cuba is?

 

[k]

That's a horrible idea and opens pandora's box.

 

[Blackguard_]

While performance based pay for teachers is not a bad idea, basing it off student performance is stupid.
Some people simply are bad students. I think these people have seen "Stand and Deliver" too many times.

It would be better to have performance based pay based on ratings from other teachers, who would be more likely to undertand that some people, you just can't reach.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

I don’t have a problem with it as long as it is implemented properly. I know that Singapore, for example, runs their schools this way and for the most part it works well.

It would certainly get rid of the useless hangers on who are simply given pay rises because they’ve hung around long enough, at the expense of other teachers who genuinely put in the effort.

 

[MichaelFJF]

Longevity should count for squat unless you're doing the job in the first place. I like the idea. It may not be perfect but it's a start.

 

[Heiroglyph]

Good luck getting teachers willing to work with disadvantaged kids then.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Good luck getting teachers willing to work with disadvantaged kids then.

No really, at least if the system is propoerly done. The examples I've seen work off an incremental increase in student performance, rather than just raw test scores. They also account for the fact that brighter kids do better than not-so-bright ones.

Still don't see a problem with it in principle.

 

[TeddyKGB]

Good luck getting teachers willing to work with disadvantaged kids then.

Also my first thought, but the article briefly mentions "financial incentives to teachers who agree to work in hard-to-staff schools." So, we'll see.

 

[shinbits]

I'm against this proposal for a few reasons.

First, teachers can't make kids want to learn.

Kids are more preocupied with pop-culture then education. Basically, many kids don't want to learn, and are only there becaused they have to be. It's not the teacher's fault if they don't perform well because of this.

Second, I am of the opinion that it will cause some teachers to cheat when grading a paper.

It's tough enough just maintaining order in a classroom, but if teachers are faced with the threat of lower pay if their class doesn't do well, then there will be a rise in grades which aren't accurate. It's only human nature.


I think a better way to do it, would be to offer a good base pay, and a generous bonus pay that is recieved at the end of the semester. That would be more effective motivation.

 

[Voegelin]

True performance based pay is impossible in the current system. Teachers do need to be paid what they are worth. Let's see how much parents are willing to pay. Separate School and State:

http://www.sepschool.org/

 

[Norseman]

I'm against this proposal for a few reasons.

First, teachers can't make kids want to learn.

Kids are more preocupied with pop-culture then education. Basically, many kids don't want to learn, and are only there becaused they have to be. It's not the teacher's fault if they don't perform well because of this.

Part of a good teacher's job is to make the students want to learn. Perhaps the students could get incentives for improvement as well. Then all parties involved would be interested in getting grades high and keeping them there.

Second, I am of the opinion that it will cause some teachers to cheat when grading a paper.

It's tough enough just maintaining order in a classroom, but if teachers are faced with the threat of lower pay if their class doesn't do well, then there will be a rise in grades which aren't accurate. It's only human nature.

Yeah, when I saw the thread title I was concerned about that. But I thought about it, and my solution is that teachers should be required to grade each-other's students double-blindly. After the teacher has graded the paper, the teacher should sign it. Then, it will be possible to occasionally do administrative reviews of grading and look for any attempts to artificially boost averages, and identify the teachers who are guilty of it.

I think a better way to do it, would be to offer a good base pay, and a generous bonus pay that is recieved at the end of the semester. That would be more effective motivation.

Except they don't get anything for doing better. There is no incentive. You just pay them more. This is reasonable if teachers aren't getting enough to live on, in which case sure, raise their pay. But if you want to boost performance, that's not how you do it.

 

[Ave Maria]

I like the idea but unfortunately it seems to have many flaws.

 

[shinbits]

Except they don't get anything for doing better. There is no incentive. You just pay them more. This is reasonable if teachers aren't getting enough to live on, in which case sure, raise their pay. But if you want to boost performance, that's not how you do it.

I meant give them a bonus should the students get high grades. I thought that was implied, but I guess I should've made it clearer.

 

[Norseman]

I meant give them a bonus should the students get high grades. I thought that was implied, but I guess I should've made it clearer.

But that creates the same problems. With the current system and that, teachers would just "help" their students by being way to easy with everything. That would create the opposite effect. You need a system like what I proposed so that teachers can't do that. When you have that system, then whatever pay system you want is ok.

I think both high grades and improvement should count towards higher pay for the teacher, and it should be a constant throughout the year, to give immediate incentives, rather than allowing the teacher to ignore it because it's so far away. However, the measures for student progress and achievment should be determined adminstratively. That is, the teachers shouldn't be both determining the quality of their education and getting paid for the quality of their education. That would just be begging for exploitation.

I think it might also be effective for the schools to provide a small allowance to students for good grades and for improving their grades so that everyone involved is interested in student improvement and achievment. I'm still mulling this idea over, so I'd appreciate comments or criticisms on that.

 

[Doctrine1st]

This is a horrid idea and will as someone noted open a can of worms where actual performance will suffer, just like it did in Texas under Bush.

 

[Helo]

Is it the teacher's fault that kids are more interested in going to the mall than learning where cuba is?

Yes it is.

In 12th grade I had a class called 19th Century Wars and one of the best damn teachers in the world. I looked foreward to that class every day and I loved every minnute of it. It was fun, it was exciting, it was educational. Is it because it was war class? Most definately not.

We had a sub for two weeks. He taught history at my school and I have never known a more BORING class in my 13 years of school than 19th Century Wars was when we had that sub, it was two bloody weeks of facts, statistics, maps, battleplans, and casualty evaluations.

The teacher was Mr. Ward. He was THE best teacher. He could teach anyboddy anything. And EVERYBODDY passed his class.

I also had a teacher for Econ (Economics). Each day in that class felt like it was sucking my soul from my body. I slacked off in that class like you wouldnt believe. I wrote down the most random CRAP for answers on basically everything and it ALWAYS came back with an A on top. He never failed anyboddy because he was too flippin lazy.

 

[momalle1]

Performance based pay that is based on someone elses performance is seriously flawed.

 

[SallyNow]

Good luck getting teachers willing to work with disadvantaged kids then.

Just what I was thinking. Student-performance-based pay is silly, if one knows the school system.

First off, you have to deal with that many teachers will "teach the government test" rather than teaching the whole range of issues. Government tests are often limited in their range, and only serve specific purposes.

Also, schools in more expensive areas often have kids whose parents will have tutors any ways, not so they can get a better education, but simply so they can pass tests better and get into better universities-which is why I am glad I live in an area that has universities that use both test scores and overall achievement and life to judge a potential student.

Areas with good teachers, that teach an overall subject, and just limited government exam subject areas, but that are poorer, often end up with students that do not have the best government test results. But, they often have good overall life chances, because their teachers are teaching them solid skills and their parents realize the value of a good, rounded education, and also take every opportunity to teach their kids at home or with community programs.

A simple solution for getting better teachers is this: give education the respect it deserves.

Don't make a joke out of it. Make sure that every teacher teaching knows the subject they are teaching, and has a bachelor's degree and a teaching degree, and hopefully even a master's degree, unless they are teaching something that very specialized that requires more hands-on or experience-based training.

Keep changing up the government tests and the curriculum, to keep both teachers and students creative in a good way.

Make teacher's pay competitive with other professions that require the same amount of schooling, skill and time: as in, lawyers, nurses, accountants, MBA's. Make teacher training and entry-level positions competitive, too. Make sure that teachers can not get in front of a class until they have shown that they can, in fact, be good teachers: have each student teacher have at least two semesters of in-class training, and make sure they are passionate and well-rounded on the subject. That tells much more than any government exam.

Stop with the joke "those who can, do, those who can't, teach". The truth is that most teachers are teachers because they can do many things very well, and they want to help the next generation. They relate to students in a positive way. They have what many others do not, and that is worth just as much as the ability to manipulate the law or other people's finances.

Schools would perform better if they were comprehensive, holistic budgets, rather than performance-based ones. What do I mean? Simple: a school budget should be based on what a community needs, not what it already has.

 

[simplicity]

I would support this type of initiative for vocational programs with standardized, closely monitored tests. I also think students should be chosen by committee rather than open access or selective control by the instructors.